1. 19
  1. 4

    I wonder how it looks if you are typing in several languages.

    If I remember correctly, some of those layouts are tuned specifically for English.

    1. 8

      I wonder how it looks if you are typing in several languages.

      It’s bad. And it always will be. I typed on german QWERTZ for most of my life and for programming it’s pain. alt gr + 7 to type { is insane. That’s why the fun intersection between German and Programming Neo2 was invented. I was born in Belarus and work for a Japanese company. QWERTY’s Y and Z being so far apart is aweful for the ず and ゆ in QWERTY-Japanese and when writing Russian without mnemonic / translit I stumble when trying to remember where the hell ё went.

      There is no “one to rule them all” and never will be I think. You either learn the native optimized layout or have to live with your WPM cut in half.

      1. 4

        Yes, that matches my experience, and is why the Layout Wars seem a bit odd to me.

        I have more trouble switching layouts, so I have a custom one that works for all the languages I use regularly, but is probably far from ideal for any one of them.

    2. 4

      I’ve typed Dvorak since 2002 or so, and this makes a lot of sense to me. Dvorak is by no means the most effective or the easiest to learn, but Qwerty is so bad that just getting off it onto anything else is a huge improvement, and the difference between the others are essentially rounding errors by comparison.

      These days while I’d never consider switching off Dvorak, I don’t recommend it to others. Rather than trying to choose the most efficient layout, I think it’s better to optimize for ease of learning. Colemak is much easier than Dvorak for folks coming from Qwerty, and with http://www.minimak.org/ it’s even easier.

      1. 4

        I’ve been on Dvorak since 2007 so I can relate. Everything past Dvorak seems like minor improvements. There are things I really do like about Dvorak as a programmer, namely - on the home row for kebab-case and snake_case code, as well as throwing the [] in the top because I just don’t use those symbols as much. When I look at other layouts keeping - where it is to be easier to learn, I think my own job would be less ergonomic and easy.

        That said, I was totally looking at Halmak pretty seriously last night (if swapping -= for [])

        Also I think a lot of the automated tests for this aren’t thinking as logically about how humans break up words when typing. I was helping on a layout for Thai, IKBAEB, when the owner (and native speaker) put it in maintenance mode for another layout that just feels like the result of algorithm. I asked around to some other people and when thinking of words, even though tone markers are used frequently, it was not the base of how people think about the characters and when typed they usually come last, but over at Manoonchai, tone markers are on the home row because the language doesn’t have spaces really and algorithms don’t think about how abugida clusters are calculated in the brain. IKBAEB had that Dvorak feel to it: crafted by a human and while not peak optimal, the positions were chosen with deliberate intent.

        1. 3

          Dvorak typist here since 2005. Even knowing the less steep learning curve of Colemak and it’s overall improved efficiency compared to Dvorak, I’d still chose Dvorak. Having it as an ANSI standard means I am practically guaranteed to have it installed by default on any computer I sit in front of. I don’t have that same guarantee with Colemak.

          1. 1

            I think the last time I saw a computer that didn’t have Colemak available was 2007. Do you have an example?

            1. 2

              Windows 10.

        2. 2

          Why don’t these analyses ever include the ETAOIN SHRDLU linotype layout?

          1. 2